Coronavirus

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,614
Reaction score
2,051
Regarding cancer, no. During lockdown and even right through the summer people were either not getting treated or getting through the process far too slowly. They might as well have had covid on their death certificates.
And I would hazard a guess that their average age was significantly lower that that of covid related victims.
But - why are we ok for their lives to be extended beyond their terminal disease, at huge cost to society? Because one day we might get cancer?

We'll be old too, one day.
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,614
Reaction score
2,051
Thank you Dee
I’m confident she has something else but until we hear it, will be concerned till then.
It's a real worry. I hope the test result comes back quickly. We tested Seth during that one week where the labs were buckling and even booking a test took days, and even then we got the results back in just a smidge over 24 hours.

My friend's husband has covid and he's been in hospital for well over a week now. I think I understand more about Boris Johnson's experience earlier in the year - my friend's husband is sitting up in bed, doing puzzles and watching TV, but without oxygen and a drip of... something... to support his white blood cells, he plummets. Someone - I think walleye? - pondered why we can't treat people like that at home, and that's my friend's thought too. Maybe that just shifts the problem to the people that have to come out and change your fluids and things. I don't know.
 

fixedspool

Well-known member
Messages
858
Reaction score
283
Regarding cancer, no. During lockdown and even right through the summer people were either not getting treated or getting through the process far too slowly. They might as well have had covid on their death certificates.
And I would hazard a guess that their average age was significantly lower that that of covid related victims.

Absolutely right. Why is a Covid sufferer more deserving than a cancer or brain injury patient in getting appropriate treatment. Why should a man in a white coat be given the power of life or death over someone as he weighs up their worth. It's an impossible situation and no one should have to make that sort of decision.
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,614
Reaction score
2,051
Absolutely right. Why is a Covid sufferer more deserving than a cancer or brain injury patient in getting appropriate treatment. Why should a man in a white coat be given the power of life or death over someone as he weighs up their worth. It's an impossible situation and no one should have to make that sort of decision.
But if there were no covid restrictions at all, those are the decisions doctors would have to make. Once surplus capacity has been taken up by covid patients, scheduled/elective services are cancelled. There'll come a point like there was in countries like Spain and Italy earlier in the year, facing turning covid patients away, effectively condemning them to death.

A covid sufferer is no more or less deserving than a cancer or brain injury patient, to my mind. Some people consider them less deserving, as they are old. But I do struggle to see the difference morally between extending the life of a brain injury patient artificially, through intervention, and a covid patient. It gets into playing god territory and massively devalues our older population.
 

seeking

Well-known member
Messages
4,252
Reaction score
653
Location
Yorkshire (were there a god it'd be god's own coun
You see, this is the bit that has me thinking a lot. I don't want to live in a society where we basically decide whether it is worth spending money or suffering incovenience just to keep people alive based on age. It massively devalues the elderly and the infirm, many of whom are the most valuable in our society.

And yes, I know many decisions like this are made on a daily basis but I fear this direction more than I fear an increase in national debt and temporary restrictions.

On aggregate you may be right with tour statement. But on an individual and personal level its just not right and is not palatable for the vast majority of the population. It's also not a direction in which I'd like to set precedent on such a scale.

Hello Walleye

We agree to a greater or lesser extent.

But that is what "medical professionals" should do day by day. Unfortunately it is always a cost benefit analysis, callous though that may seem.

As AI takes over and it is out of your hands even more then it will depend who does the programming. Don't be surprised if it's the Bezos types or medicalisers of life that come out on top...


You say it is "not palatable for the vast majority of the population". I disagree.

And I don't think you speak for them. I am now in an African country where by far the largest proportion is the young, who should have only hope ahead of them. Instead, their future has been destroyed by the great global overreaction to CV19, which is not registering on deaths, but it's impact blights the economy and causes more poverty, instability and destruction.

I agree it is definitely unpalatable to those old grey haired blokes (generally) in UK most at risk, for them to be "surrendered to die of CV19".

And whilst they have been growing in numbers over the decades (hence a corrolary impacting on NHS efficacy), they are not "the vast majority".
They are a small and ever-dwindling minority.

They are a naturally diminishing proportion. You know how demographics works.

The "vast majority of the population" are the young, and student age folk who should be allowed the life you and I have already had, especially because they are more or less insulated from being harmed by CV19.

People grow old. It's part of life. You do not cheat the reaper, no matter what form s/he comes in.

Gates can't, I can't, you can't, Mr Witless Duo can't.

CV19 is a drop in the ocean. But the so-called "Cure" is immensely damaging.

You do not burn the house down to kill a mouse. Unless you are a proponent of CV19-related Lockdown, seemingly.

If it has to be reduced to a simple binary choice between me freely taking my chances and maybe dying of CV19 once I've had my allotted time (or even before!), or my kids being deprived of the wholescale freedoms I experienced (I note you optimistically refer to increased national debt and "temporary" restrictions - I disagree most strongly that this will be temporary - the freedom we knew pre-2020 is stolen from us now)...

...then I choose death.


My choice.


That's the way it should be. But unfortunately the "Health Nazis" and natural totalitarians in Parliament (both sides, a pox on both their houses!) have spotted the opportunity to make everyone poorer (unless they're an MP or PPE-supplying mate of one seemingly) and grasped it with both hands.

Memento mori
 
Last edited:

Tangled

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reaction score
519
Why is a Covid sufferer more deserving than a cancer or brain injury patient in getting appropriate treatment. Why should a man in a white coat be given the power of life or death over someone as he weighs up their worth. It's an impossible situation and no one should have to make that sort of decision.

Those kinds of decisions are taken everyday in all of our hospitals. it's grim but it's absolutely part of the day job. In a situation where hospitals were being overwhelmed really desperate measures have to be taken. We just have to feel grateful that we're not in those situations and not criticise those that are for trying to do their best.
 

Elibank

Well-known member
Messages
1,886
Reaction score
950
Location
Derbyshire

Andrew B

Well-known member
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
882
“We must follow THE science” is the well used phrase being used.
I think it was back in September when Trump announced that they may well have a vaccine in November and the media over there went berserk saying it was very unlikely? Then just days after the election Bidens team announced they had a vaccine as well. Both sides and the media using a pandemic to play politics is pretty lame imo.
Re the vaccine I’m wondering how a 95% vaccine works against a virus that the body has a 99.97% chance of overcoming? So I’m being a little sarcastic but if one has the vaccine and is still expected to wear a mask and lockdown it does make me wonder?
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,614
Reaction score
2,051
I’d like to meet Caroline Cake, she sounds like a sweetie.....❤

Apparently she's Chief Executive Officer at Health Data Research UK (HDRUK), the UK's national institute for health data science. I bet as a result she doesn't eat much cake. My best friend used to smoke, until she started running clinical trials for lung cancer treatments.
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
2,123
Reaction score
576
Location
Isle of Lewis
Apparently she's Chief Executive Officer at Health Data Research UK (HDRUK), the UK's national institute for health data science. I bet as a result she doesn't eat much cake. My best friend used to smoke, until she started running clinical trials for lung cancer treatments.
A number cruncher. Dodgy characters......
 

seeking

Well-known member
Messages
4,252
Reaction score
653
Location
Yorkshire (were there a god it'd be god's own coun
Regarding cancer, no. During lockdown and even right through the summer people were either not getting treated or getting through the process far too slowly. They might as well have had covid on their death certificates.
And I would hazard a guess that their average age was significantly lower that that of covid related victims.

Rest assured, if they got so bad that they were finally admitted to die in hospital, and were there for a week or two, they would have in all probablilty.

Not just cancer, everything else that got overlooked for months...

Sad, but true.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reaction score
519
So is 'the point' that we should have had no public intervention and lockdown and let the virus do it's thing pending a vaccine? The reasoning being that lockdown comes with its own problems of economic and health damage.

It's a rational argument but the political consequences of that kind of psychopathic calculation would be hard to tolerate in a democracy. We've seen that experiment run is Sweden and the USA.
 
Last edited:

Tangled

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reaction score
519
No, anyone deemed at risk shields. The rest of us take our chances, with sensible precautions. The current strategies in Europe are not working or sustainable.

I'm not seeing any difference to what I said. Of course if we decided to not to impose restrictions, the old, weak and vulnerable would do their best not to get it.
 

seeking

Well-known member
Messages
4,252
Reaction score
653
Location
Yorkshire (were there a god it'd be god's own coun
So is 'the point' that we should have had no public intervention and lockdown and let the virus do it's thing pending a vaccine? The reasoning being that lockdown comes with its own problems of economic and health damage.

It's a rational argument ...

Indeed it is!

Not only that, but in retrospect it's the only logical answer. We clearly need to learn to live with CV19, as Sweden etc. has.



... the political consequences of that kind of psychopathic calculation would be hard to tolerate in a democracy. We've seen that experiment run is Sweden and the USA.

Sorry, that appeat to be cobblers. And volte face

The "psychcopathic" response of fascistic-type lockdown, enforced muzzling, abandonment of democracy and destruction of previous civil liberties is far harder to tolerate for any democrat or libertarian!

Sweden's outcome is substantially better than our own, with the obvious benefit of a much more normal life all the way through, and all that without hocking their future. Result...

;) maybe you'd recommend burning the house down to solve the mouse problem. I'm not a fan of that approach personally.
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,614
Reaction score
2,051

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,614
Reaction score
2,051
Indeed it is!

Not only that, but in retrospect it's the only logical answer. We clearly need to learn to live with CV19, as Sweden etc. has.





Sorry, that appeat to be cobblers. And volte face

The "psychcopathic" response of fascistic-type lockdown, enforced muzzling, abandonment of democracy and destruction of previous civil liberties is far harder to tolerate for any democrat or libertarian!

Sweden's outcome is substantially better than our own, with the obvious benefit of a much more normal life all the way through, and all that without hocking their future. Result...

;) maybe you'd recommend burning the house down to solve the mouse problem. I'm not a fan of that approach personally.

It’s interesting that in Sweden there is effectively state-controlled media and those that speak out against the strategy being pursued are losing their job and even leaving the country. Sounds a bit... fascist? If we’re throwing the word around like sweeties. Also a little like people are being actually muzzled.

I don’t know how you can look at their deaths relative to their neighbours and conclude that Sweden has got it right.

I don’t think they do, either, as the restrictions tighten.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reaction score
519
Indeed it is!

Sure, that's why I said it.

Not only that, but in retrospect it's the only logical answer.

Well no, it's not the only logical answer. Leaving aside the obvious point that decisions can not be made in hindsight, there are other logical outcomes because you are not taking into account the other consequecies involved in the 'do nothing' case. And we won't know the best answers until this is all over.

We clearly need to learn to live with CV19, as Sweden etc.

Sweden is now seeing the consequences of that and has imposed a lockdown. They admit they got it wrong. There are few other etcs.

The "psychcopathic" response of fascistic-type lockdown, enforced muzzling, abandonment of democracy and destruction of previous civil liberties is far harder to tolerate for any democrat or libertarian!

Do you wear a seat belt?

Sweden's outcome is substantially better than our own, with the obvious benefit of a much more normal life all the way through, and all that without hocking their future. Result...

Germany's result is better than both. Vietnam better than them and New Zealand better than any. Sweden needs to be compared with the rest of Scandinavia - which it is far worse - and to itself. It's now in lockdown.

maybe you'd recommend burning the house down to solve the mouse problem. I'm not a fan of that approach personally.

I believe in human responses to human problems. But I also want them moderated by rational thinking. You have yet to show that the leissez faire approach would in fact not also close down the economy (let alone the hospitals) even if it was politically possible. That's quite a tough one to model.
 

Andrew B

Well-known member
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
882
Sweden made the same stupid care home mistake as everywhere else which are a huge proportion of deaths.
Find me somewhere that didn’t do that?
My uncle knew an old lady who instead of being sent home after an op, was sent to a care home and died. The most troubling thing of all was her family had no input or any say in the matter. That’s not trusting any science to put the elderly who have potentially been exposed into care homes.
My grandma is a Jehovah’s Witness and just before it all started she moved to a care home run by her own church and because they wouldn’t allow any new patients no matter the money offered? All three homes in badly hit areas have zero cases or deaths to date.
Imo any reasonable person without a science background would come to the same conclusion about keeping care homes safe.
 

Walleye

Well-known member
Messages
2,814
Reaction score
1,474
Hello Walleye

We agree to a greater or lesser extent.

But that is what "medical professionals" should do day by day. Unfortunately it is always a cost benefit analysis, callous though that may seem.

As AI takes over and it is out of your hands even more then it will depend who does the programming. Don't be surprised if it's the Bezos types or medicalisers of life that come out on top...


You say it is "not palatable for the vast majority of the population". I disagree.

And I don't think you speak for them. I am now in an African country where by far the largest proportion is the young, who should have only hope ahead of them. Instead, their future has been destroyed by the great global overreaction to CV19, which is not registering on deaths, but it's impact blights the economy and causes more poverty, instability and destruction.

I agree it is definitely unpalatable to those old grey haired blokes (generally) in UK most at risk, for them to be "surrendered to die of CV19".

And whilst they have been growing in numbers over the decades (hence a corrolary impacting on NHS efficacy), they are not "the vast majority".
They are a small and ever-dwindling minority.

They are a naturally diminishing proportion. You know how demographics works.

The "vast majority of the population" are the young, and student age folk who should be allowed the life you and I have already had, especially because they are more or less insulated from being harmed by CV19.

People grow old. It's part of life. You do not cheat the reaper, no matter what form s/he comes in.

Gates can't, I can't, you can't, Mr Witless Duo can't.

CV19 is a drop in the ocean. But the so-called "Cure" is immensely damaging.

You do not burn the house down to kill a mouse. Unless you are a proponent of CV19-related Lockdown, seemingly.

If it has to be reduced to a simple binary choice between me freely taking my chances and maybe dying of CV19 once I've had my allotted time (or even before!), or my kids being deprived of the wholescale freedoms I experienced (I note you optimistically refer to increased national debt and "temporary" restrictions - I disagree most strongly that this will be temporary - the freedom we knew pre-2020 is stolen from us now)...

...then I choose death.


My choice.

That's the way it should be. But unfortunately the "Health Nazis" and natural totalitarians in Parliament (both sides, a pox on both their houses!) have spotted the opportunity to make everyone poorer (unless they're an MP or PPE-supplying mate of one seemingly) and grasped it with both hands.

Memento mori
Seeking, I think we couldn't disagree more.

On one particular point, you say our freedoms have been stolen from us permanently. I hear this often but how do you know? For me it is an extreme position taken to justify anti-lockdown with no basis in fact or any probability of actually happening.

In your world we eventually withdraw all healthcare provision from folk over a certain age because it costs the taxpayer far too much and doesn't contribute to capital creation. You could of course pay for healthcare yourself but only if you can afford it from your life savings.
Taxing people to keep the nearly dead alive will be a thing of the past. After all, burdening the young when they could be out spending their money productively and boosting the economy are far more worthy activities than paying for drugs to keep a nearly dead alive.
Imagine a society where we don't have to use taxpayers money to "save" people who are going to die soon anyway. We could spend many billions a year investing in poor African countries to help all those young folk out of poverty so they can make more money for us. Capital is always searching for cheap labour and Africa seems to be a good enough source of cheap labour so that policy fits.
When you are no longer able to be productive, well feck you, you are a drain on capital so we don't care about you any more.

For the observant, what I am talking about is self vs society, or more accurately, rampant capitalism vs socialism. Its the difference between working for capital and making capital work for us.

Your position is only and can only be logical from the viewpoint of an ultra capitalist.

Yet none of you seem to see this coming. That to me is the most interesting thing.
 

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
459
Location
Mid Wales
On one particular point, you say our freedoms have been stolen from us permanently. I hear this often but how do you know? For me it is an extreme position taken to justify anti-lockdown with no basis in fact or any probability of actually happening.

Isn't that the truth? As for Sweden they are in lockdown, Spain are on a curfew. etc etc

as for the anti's, its all been done before

 
D

Deleted member 945

Guest
Freedom is an illusion anyway. Most things are artificial constructs in the human collective psyche.
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,614
Reaction score
2,051
Is there a specific word for a capitalist system where capital serves people, rather than people serving capital? Because I think that's what I am. (Naive capitalist?) Is that actually what socialism is...?
 
Top